About your Search

20110701
20110731
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3
companies are earning big money. we've got a real problem here. we want to do the right thing and we want to protect people. that is the end of may. i call on senator ihop. >> i want to thank you for holding this important hearing. you and your staff to put a great deal of time and effort into preparing the investigative report the committee released today. i also want to thank those at the federal and state levels who have pushed for the legal action. i want to recognize a former colleague, lisa madigan, the attorney general in illinois who i worked with. she has been active in this field and i welcome heard here this morning. for more than a decade, new hampshire has had a primer for responding to a practice known as cramming. when i served as the state's top law enforcement officer, and oversaw an active protection -- consumer protection bureau which include the publication of consumer protection source book and brochures to provide individuals with information how to protect against cramming. in new hampshire, the public utilities commission is authorized to find service providers and
. what is pro-big business is actually sometimes more fundamentally seen as pro-first amendment. >> i could just add a footnote to that. it is interesting that justice brier, i think it, brought this out to discuss the commercial speech issue. there are some cases in which businesses are winning and some of them as a strike me as corp. first amendment issues. citizens united is a core but first amendment speech for corporations issue. they do not seem to have much to do with the corporate governance for self expression when is someone trying to put together a lot of information about who is taking which prescription and which doctors are prescribing which so they can market their drugs more effectively. is it first amendment case, but it does not feel like one to me, or apparently justice breyer. >> the same justices that dissented, including the female justices, joined at scully of -- scalia's broad view on violent video games. they are not necessarily about how we organize ourselves either. >> they are the multi-billion dollar gaming industry. that is not the way that most people re
of the big questions that we raised reight away with the pakistani government. what gives? they try to figure out the same thing. but, pakistan is a large country. it is one of their lessons learned right now in terms of what they need to do to make sure they are aware of what is happening. and there have been individuals in the past from al-qaeda dattht have used the area as a transit point. >> in the front row. >> brad just ask the first -- asekd the -- asked the first question that i had in mind. clearly, one of our preferred tools for dealing with al-qaeda and its militants is targeted killing. i understand that it is perfectly legal. in that sense, i have no problem with it. it strikes me how much we rely on that to include targeting some people who are american citizens. it is that problematic in the long run? not from a legal point of view, but from a reputation appointive you for what it may bring back -- reputation point of view, for what it may bring back to us from the way that we imagine ourselves? >> without speaking to any particular operational activities or abilities, let me a
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3